Indeco Engineering Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 305/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3625 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RATTAN GOYAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 305/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 INDECO ENGINEERING PVT. LTD., VS. INCOME TAX OFFIC ER, 3, DR. G.C. NARANG MARG, WARD 11(4), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. AAAC18734N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. RATTAN GOYAL, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. ROHIT GARG, SR. DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, J.M. : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) DATED 01.11. 2010 FOR A.Y. 2004-05. GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: - 1. THE ORDER OF LD. AO IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST T HE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARINGS IN AP PEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT REC EIVE ANY NOTICE DUE TO MISCHIEF OF THE STAFF WHO WAS NOT IN GOOD TERMS WITH THE ASSESEE. AFFIDAVIT OF THE DIRE CTOR OF THE COMPANY IS FILED BEFORE THE HONBLE BENCH THAT THE ITA NO. 305/D/2011 2 ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE. SO T HE ASSESSEE WAS DEBARRED BY A GENUINE CAUSE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 3. THE LD. CIT(A) AND LD. AO ARE TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIE D IN ARRIVING AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y HAS TAKEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY FROM M/S RIGHT CHOICE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. FOR RS. 10 LAC AND PAID COMMISSION OF RS. 2500/- IN FACT THE COMPANY HAS SO LD ITS INVESTMENT I.E. SHARES FOR RS. 10 LAC SO ADDITI ON OF RS. 1002500/- IS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED. 4. THE ASSESSEE RESERVES THE RIGHT TO AMEND, ALTER, DELETE, MODIFY OR WITHDRAW THE GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) IS AN EX-PARTE OR DER. IN PARA 4, LD. CIT(A) HAS RECORDED A FINDING THAT IN S PITE OF REPEATING OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED . NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS EXCEPT GROUND OF APPEAL ARE FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE. NO STATEMENT OF FACTS HAS ALSO BEEN FILE D. HOWEVER, LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 3. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSE SSEE BEFORE CIT(A) WAS FOR THE REASON OF NON-RECEIPT OF NOTICE DUE ITA NO. 305/D/2011 3 TO MISCHIEF PLAYED BY THE STAFF WHO WAS NOT IN A GO OD TERM WITH THE ASSESSEE. TO SUPPORT SUCH CONTENTION, ASS ESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT AND SUCH MISCHIEF IS STATED TO BE OCCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF LABOUR UNREST. 4. RELYING UPON THE GROUND NO. 1 AND ALSO ON THE AF FIDAVIT FILED BY THE DIRECTOR, IT WAS THE CASE OF THE LD. A R THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BAC K TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE OPPORTUNITY OF REPRESENTING ITS CASE BEFORE LD. CIT (A) FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN THE KNOWLEDGE O F FIXED DATE OF HEARING. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. D R RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A). AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE TY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND ALSO THE AFFIDAV IT FILED BY THE DIRECTOR, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IF THE MATER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FO R RE- ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. TO ENSURE THE COMPLIANCE, WE HAVE ITA NO. 305/D/2011 4 DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON 08.11.2011 WHEN LD. CIT(A) WILL RE- ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY O F HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. 7. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT UPON THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 7.07.2011 SD/- SD/- (K.G. BANSAL) (I.P. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 7.7.11 *KAVITA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR